Welcome to Britmodeller.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      PhotoBucket are no longer permitting 3rd party hosting   01/07/17

      As most of you are now painfully aware, Photobucket (PB) are stopping/have stopped allowing their members to link their accumulated years of photos into forums and the like, which they call 3rd party linking.  You can give them a non-refundable $399 a year to allow links, but I doubt that many will be rushing to take them up on that offer.  If you've previously paid them for the Pro account, it looks like you've got until your renewal to find another place to host your files, but you too will be subject to this ban unless you fork over a lot of cash.   PB seem to be making a concerted move to another type of customer, having been the butt of much displeasure over the years of a constantly worsening user interface, sloth and advertising pop-ups, with the result that they clearly don't give a hoot about the free members anymore.  If you don't have web space included in your internet package, you need to start looking for another photo host, but choose carefully, as some may follow suit and ditch their "free" members at some point.  The lesson there is keep local backups on your hard drive of everything you upload, so you can walk away if the same thing happens.   There's a thread on the subject here, so please use that to curse them, look for solutions or generall grouse about their mental capacity.   Not a nice situation for the forum users that hosted all their photos there, and there will now be a host of useless threads that relied heavily on photos from PB, but as there's not much we can do other than petition for a more equitable solution, I suggest we make the best of what we have and move on.  One thing is for certain.  It won't win them any friends, but they may not care at this point.    Mike.

Steve in Ottawa

Members
  • Content count

    230
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

38 Excellent

1 Follower

About Steve in Ottawa

  • Rank
    Established Member
  • Birthday 20/07/55

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ottawa,, Ontario, Canada
  • Interests
    Spitfires, big time
    1/48 RCAF and CAF aircraft
    Commonwealth WW II
    Luftwaffe WW II
    Cdn Army vehicles
    NATO Air Forces
    Israeli Air Force

Recent Profile Visitors

1,129 profile views
  1. To help settle the dust on this window thing I started up I dug through my own files on TZ138 and found photos showing that in its RCAF service the camera windows were covered over with that concave panel set-up on both sides, per the photo I dropped in of TZ198. The aircraft came over to Canada minus any camera gear, as the winter testing was not related to that equipment. Interesting that after it got painted silver that the starboard side camera window was uncovered. Hope I didn't add any stress to the discussion.
  2. I've known that that there is a door with a window and an alternate door with that concave (?) fitting in place of the inset optical glass. Now I'm wondering the GMZ had this kind of door fitted after its RCAF use, or if there was another creative solution by the aircraft's civilian owner to modify the original FR door? Has anybody seen a good photo of the wartime non-glass panel for an FR.XIV? Again, let me say that this is a good constructive discussion and this in one of the reasons I enjoy the BM style of respectful debate. I have a future plan for a 1/48 TZ138 in its RCAF life on skis, and then as CF-FMZ as #80. This is all good stuff!
  3. Good discussion as usual. Interesting that we're seeing different things in the reference photos. I'd love to see that area of the Thai aircraft from the same angles as the reference photos - it would an educational exercise in photo interpretation.
  4. I dunno, Peter. From the four-shot photo spread I'm reading it as a 'flat' panel for the roundel area. The positioning of the roundel over the window seems to indicate that there was a defined area to place it upon. In the bottom left shot of the four it looks like it is inset against the fuselage skin, much like the Thai aircraft configuration. Just spitballing here. It's a tough call. On the original FR.XIV (vice the restoration photo at the top of this post) is the starboard camera window panel supposed to be the same or similar to the port one?
  5. Hi Peter, Very interesting to follow this build. If I may make an observation about the reference photo you have at the top of this post - should the FR camera window be curved like the fuselage? Or should it be an optically flat glass panel for the camera to 'see' through clearly? You can see in this photo of TZ198 that the camera panel is flat or 'dimpled in' compared to the fuselage skin. I haven't looked at many shots of this area on operational FR.XIV aircraft, but my work background in photography tells me this should be a flat glass panel. Do you have any clear shots of CF-GMZ to show this area?
  6. Really interesting to see that, Dave, thanks. It's a bit earlier than this discussion but still very interesting to see that this kind of thing did happen.
  7. This might be in B-scheme, but that's based solely on the pattern demarcation seen ahead of the roundel. I'm not sure if the tones near the exhaust represent paint or engine-related stains. Edit - Hmmmm, now this is getting more interesting. It's a poor image but it does look like this Mk.Vb is in the B-scheme pattern - http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/supermarine-spitfire-mk-vb-1941-the-iconic-british-second-world-war-picture-id463987573?s=612x612 as does this Turkish Mk.Vb Now I'm getting more convinced that B-scheme Spitfires were still fairly easy to find later in the war than I thought was possible:
  8. Hi Dave, Thanks for the translation of the M&S entry. I was reading that yesterday and nothing jumped out as being wing-swap worthy to me. What makes you think that the engine upgrade might have required a wing change? I suppose the 12-4-42 flying accident could have been the cause, too, but I don't know if a wing change could be done on-site by contractors.
  9. Hi OF, I think that should be further detailed to say that the alternating A and B scheme was abandoned in 1941. Manufacturers chose one or the other and could stick with using just one pattern for all their production. W3834 is a real mess when you compare it to the standard A-scheme pattern:
  10. Hi guys, great replies, thanks. What bothers me about my 'B-scheme wing in 1943' hypothesis is that they supposedly switched over to only the A-scheme very early in the Spitfire Mk.I production. But (almost) anything is possible, I suppose - I'm combing through photos to try and find any Mk.V's in B-scheme. I don't know enough about W3834's history to know if it ever had damage that might have required wing replacement at some point in its service.
  11. I'm down to painting a well-known 1943 401 Sqn Spitfire Vb, W3834, and I'm trying to sort out the odd camouflage pattern seen on this aircraft. As I was comparing known photos of this aircraft the wing camo pattern was confusing me, as the photos don't seem to match with what is considered 'normal' for an 'A-scheme', but the port wing camo makes more sense if it was 'B-pattern'. From what I can see of the of fuselage it very roughly matches up with 'A-scheme', with several significant pattern deviations from the standard. From what I can see in two photos of W3834 the port wing pattern appears to more closely conform to a B-pattern, but with some repainting to make the pattern better match up to the fuselage. So, the question is, for wartime repairs, were undamaged/repairable wings from one aircraft attached to another airframe that needed said wing? The other question considers the possibility of a Spitfire B-scheme paint pattern still in use in 1943?
  12. Peter, I've been following this build with great interest. Really fascinating and educational to see how you approach the various aspects of the model. Do you plan on having the in-progress work or the finished model at Telford this year? I'd love to see this in person; I'm not yet convinced that this really is only 1/18 scale!
  13. Hi Jun, Thanks for the images. Clearly (no pun intended) it appears that there were two styles of metal clipped wingtips - clear glass and coloured glass. Looking at the photos the coloured glass is, generally speaking, on the late-war/post-war aircraft. So for my model of a 1943-era Spitfire Vb I think I'll go with the clear glass and coloured bulbs. Great discussion and material sharing!
  14. Which photo is that, Bob? Do you have a URL for it, perchance? What you're saying about the standard wingtip makes sense to me. It would dumb to have a normal light bulb only in the wingtip. It would need the protection of a harder cover.
  15. Good info, Jun, thanks for posting it. I think we're all agreed that the initial version of the clipped wingtip was just plain wood, but by 1943 (the date of the photo of W3834 above) it looks like the clipped wingtip was like your second drawing, made of metal and with the aerodynamic light fairing in place. I'm still pondering whether the version used on W3834 is a clear lens with the standard wingtip's coloured lamp shining through it, or if the wartime clipped wingtip had a coloured lens. From what I think I see in the photo I'm now leaning towards it being a clear lens with a coloured light bulb inside it, but happy to discuss further. I'm also willing to entertain that a different/later version of the metal wingtip had red and green coloured lenses incorporated in their construction. Lots of fun to try and figure this stuff out.